War is sometimes just, other times unjust. But war is NEVER trivial and ALWAYS hell, and writers have been writing about it since the dawn of humankind. This blog is devoted to stories, poems, essays, letters, journals, articles, and speeches about war, written by soldiers, dissidents, hawks, doves, famous and unknown people--whoever has an opinion about or experiences with war.

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

9/11: Where Were You on That Terrible Tuesday?

.Jennifer Semple Siegel's story:

My story is unremarkable, but my horror was not.

At 8:46 AM, I was asleep when Flight 11 hit the North Tower.

My husband nudged me awake. "The World Trade Center is on fire," he said as he flipped on the TV, an old black and white portable. "A plane crashed into one of the towers."

I jumped out of bed, memory of the 1993 WTC bombing smouldering in my brain. Terrorism?

"When I went into the shower, Katie Couric...," he said. "By the time I was out...this."

"Terrorism," I said.

"They're not saying. Could be an accident."

But I knew. I could feel the hate vibrating in my bones. A sense of panic. I dressed without showering and went into the living room, and flipped on NBC.

In living color, we saw the second plane slice into the South Tower.

9:03 AM, Flight 175.

Yes. Terrorism.

Jerry had classes and left for school. I was on a Monday-Wednesday schedule, so I stayed home alone.

I remember looking out the window as Jerry backed the car out of the driveway. As the world ends, I will die here at home, all alone.

Our college did not cancel day classes, which was kind of odd--I still think so--but they did cancel Tuesday night.

On NBC, I heard Jim Maceda's firsthand report from the Pentagon as an explosion rocked in the background. "What was that?" he asked--at least that's how I remember it.

9:38 AM: Flight 77.

9:59 AM: South tower collapses.

10:10 AM: Flight 93. Pennsylvania.

10:28 AM: North tower collapses.

It was an eerie disconnect; it was an absolutely stunning fall day, brilliant blue sky, about 70 degrees and yet the world, filled with roiling black smoke and collapsing buildings, was ending.

I looked to the sky for answers.

What other horrors remain in flight?

Three-Mile Island, 20 miles away, a logical terrorist bull's eye.

I recalled TMI, in late March 1979. Evacuation. A mass exodus out of central Pennsylvania. Panic.

But where does one flee when the world is ending?

I did the typical things people did that day: I cried; I shook my fist at God ("How could you allow this?"); I surfed CNN, NBC, ABC, MS-NBC; I proclaimed my hatred for the perpetrators, whoever they were; I watched as American flags on cars began flapping in the wind and--

God Bless America.

--I waited for the end.

To my relief, Jerry came home, and the world hadn't ended yet.

Like millions of other Americans, we decided to donate blood for the survivors who would surely be dug out of the rubble.

The blood bank asked us a few questions: they rejected Jerry because of a medical issue and gave me a number.

"Come back in two hours." The line was long and not enough blood collectors. I later learned that subsequent donors were told to come back the next day.

We didn't act like people anticipating their last day on earth; we ate dinner at a Chinese buffet, but our taste buds were numb. We ate because it was time to eat, and, besides, I couldn't give blood on an empty stomach.

After giving my pint, I still had to do gurney time and drink plenty of Gatorade, despite my full stomach.

Back home and recovering, I tried preparing for Wednesday classes, though I knew both I and my students would not have Freshman Composition or Creative Writing on our minds, though later in semester, students would begin writing about this day.

I called my aunt in Iowa, and Jerry called his mother in Florida; we just wanted to be sure no one we knew and loved was in those planes or in those buildings.

In my dreams, I made an uneasy alliance with the God who had allowed this day to happen; I dreamed of CNN, news crawls, fire, smoke, rubble, dead bodies, grieving families.

Still, I began to suspect we would live another day.

And so we did.

See, I told you my story was unremarkable.

How about your story?

_____________________________

Jennifer Semple Siegel is the blog meister of It's JUST War! Yeah, it's lame to post one's own work, so how about submitting your 9/11 experience? Email me or post in the comment section of this thread._____________________________

We would like to read your war stories, poems, and essays and, possibly, even post them in this blog..This comment section is reserved for work having to do with 9/11, the war on that fateful date waged on U.S. soil: New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania..Feel free to include a short bio..If you submit your work in the comment section, we may even elevate it to a post..In any case, we will likely leave it in the comment section..By submitting here, you represent that you have written the piece and own the copyright..Previously published work welcome.

Disclaimer

All posted work reflects the opinions of the various writers and artists and does not necessarily express the opinions of the Blog meister.

All copyrights and trademarks remain with the original writers and artists.

Work in the comment section may be anonymously posted, so I have to assume that such work is original; should you recognize your work here (and you didn't post it), please email the Blog meister, and she will either remove it or attribute it properly to you.

Contributors

Criteria of Just War theory

Just War Theory has two sets of criteria. The first establishing jud as bellum, the right to go to war; the second establishing jus in bello, right conduct within war. [1]

Jus ad bellum (The Right to Go to War)

Just cause

The reason for going to war needs to be just and can therefore be recapturing things taken or punishing people who have done wrong. A contemporary view of just cause was expressed in 1993 when the US Catholic Conference said: "Force may be used only to correct a grave, public evil, i.e., aggression or massive violation of the basic human rights of whole populations."

Comparative justice

While there may be rights and wrongs on all sides of a conflict, to override the presumption against the use of force, the injustice suffered by one party must significantly outweigh that suffered by the other. Theorists such as Brian Orend omit this term, seeing it as fertile ground for exploitation by bellicose regimes.

Legitimate authority

Only duly constituted public authorities may use deadly force or wage war.

Right intention

Force may be used only in a truly just cause and solely for that purpose—correcting a suffered wrong is considered a right intention, while material gain or maintaining economies is not.

Probability of success

Arms may not be used in a futile cause or in a case where disproportionate measures are required to achieve success.

Last resort

Force may be used only after all peaceful and viable alternatives have been seriously tried and exhausted.

Jus in bello (Right Conduct Within War)

Once war has begun, just war theory also directs how combatants are to act:

Discrimination

Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of discrimination. The acts of war should be directed towards the inflictors of the wrong, and not towards civilians caught in circumstances they did not create. The prohibited acts include bombing civilian residential areas that include no military target and committing acts of terrorism or reprisal against ordinary civilians. Some believe that this rule forbids weapons of mass destruction of any kind, for any reason (such as the use of an atomic bomb).

Proportionality

Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of proportionality. The force used must be proportional to the wrong endured, and to the possible good that may come. The more disproportional the number of collateral civilian deaths, the more suspect will be the sincerity of a belligerent nation's claim to justness of a war it initiated. [2]

Minimum Force

Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of minimum force. This principle is meant to limit excessive and unnecessary death and destruction. It is different from proportionality because the amount of force proportionate to the goal of the mission might exceed the amount of force necessary to accomplish that mission. But if the mission requires much force then it is proportional to the end result.